I have never said one thing racist here Kevin, yet you have over and over accused white people as being fat and lazy. You have never even asked my opinion of illegal immigration…try to be objective. I know it’s hard with that chip on your shoulder but I have faith you can do it. My point is and has always been that illegal immigration is a drain on our society, and that coming across a border, whether in Canada, Florida, or Mexico is a crime according to US federal law. You can debate the first and I can respect that debate, the latter is not even questionable. If you choose to continually call me a racist without fact, fine, but it just shows your lack of facts and knowledge of the debate…it’s a choice…yours?
For someone who professes to respect the constitution, you just crapped all over the fifth amendment.
Kevin, a person has the right to be silent if they choose until when? Miranda does not give the person being arrested the right to remain silent for standard booking questions such as where you live or where you are from and it differs from state to state and jurisdiction to jurisdiction. There is a difference between detention and arrest also, and Miranda is not required in some jurisdictions when a person is detained. A person also is not required to receive the Miranda warning, but in most cases, not all, what they ‘confese’ can not be used against them in court.
While we have the right to remain silent, we also have a right to discuss and answer questions by law enforcement.
No, remaining silent doesn't prove guilt!
I didn’t say it did I Kevin, I said that “Generally speaking only guilty people have something to hide and are silent.” Focus on the context. I said absolutely nothing about silence proving guilt.
Everyone has the right to remain silent. A police officer cannot arrest someone for not answering a question. How would he know if that person is dumb, incapable of speech?
I never ever said that, again focus. But, a police officer does have a right in certain circumstances to “detain” a person, with a just cause, for failure to answer basic identity questions asked by an officer, again with just cause by the officer. I traffic citation is a classic example, if you are pulled over for running a stop sign and the officer asks for your ID and you refuse they could detain you and put you in custodial custody until they find out who you are. If a officer could not figure out if a person is dumb or has other handicaps then maybe they should've got out of the academy, your logic is weak and a straw man. And in that case police have officers trained for these different scenarios that might arise.
Next time you are pulled over for a traffic violation just sit there and don’t say a word and refuse to identify yourself or offer ID and see what happens?
And any citizen has the right to refuse a conversation with a police officer.
It depend on the officers perception of the situation, again an officer has the right to detain anyone at anytime with due justification, and failure to respond to the officer could lead to detention and could even lead to arrest. If a office walks up to me and says “do you have the time”, I can refuse. But if he comes up to me as asks a question concerning a crime or incident and believe that I may have been involved or have knowledge of the situation he could detain me if I refused to answer his questions, granted I would have the “right” to remain silent after the detention or arrest, but that has nothing to do with the officers right to question a person with just cause.
Providing a name and place of residence doesn't say anything about whether a person is an illegal resident. But no one has to answer these questions during routine stop-conversations that occur prior to reasonable suspicion of a crime. "The person approached, however, need not answer any question put to him; indeed, he may decline to listen to the questions at all and may go on his way.” - Florida v. Royer
I never said they do nor did the Arizona law. The law states only after suspected crime?
Florida v. Royer does not give a person the right for person in question or suspect of a crime to simply walk away.
Proper Procedure
The officers should not have asked the suspect to accompany them from the point of the initial consensual encounter to the small room until they returned his ticket and license. Trial and appellate courts have often ruled that a reasonable person would believe that he is in custody and not free to leave if asked to consent to a search or transportation while police retain something of value to that person. Police must return such items before asking a person to accompany them. The court makes its decision about custody/non-custody based on everything police say or do—the totality of circumstances test. The officers also told him they suspected him of transporting narcotics, and then confined him in a small, enclosed room. If that weren't enough, they retrieved his luggage without his consent. Thus, the Supreme Court held that a reasonable man would believe he was either under arrest, or in a custodial situation functionally equivalent to arrest. Since the officers only had reasonable suspicion, not probable cause to believe he was transporting narcotics until they opened the suitcase and found the marijuana (which they admitted in court), they had no legal right to place Mr. Royer in custody.
The officers did not have enough evidence to arrest him, but they certainly had the right to ask him questions and for ID. Try wlaking away in an airport today and see what happens?
Of course, but they cannot be arrested without due process.
Isn’t that what I and the Arizona law has been saying? Due process does not give any person the right to do what they like. The Arizona law does not allow a officer to just walk up and demand identification without due process.
I have several border patrol check points in my commute, when there are open, they look at people that fit a profile, and pull them over and ask for ID? Is that legal... Why or why not? Hen I go to Mexico, coming back into the US I am asked if I am a citizen? Is that legal and can I refuse to answer and just drive away? Where is my due process here?
On another note:
I had to go to Jury duty today, I had to fill out a questionnaire and the very first question was am I a citizen…is that against the law? Was I given due process?
Well tough s*** sherlock. I'm not here to play your neverending game of CFR while you answer zero questions and provide zero references as you did in the previous exchange. I know what I know and I know it from reliable sources. If you have an argument to the contrary then provide your sources... oh wait, you don't do that.
LoL, I guess you voted for the law before you voted against it Kevin, the same logic Kerry tried. First you say that most people are arrested because of bogus ss cards then you claim the majority are deported at the borders. You stumbling through this and can’t even get your story straight. You know two people that work for the INS so that’s fact. The same INS that can’t even keep our borders safe? But hey, they can always put up more signs saying don’t go here because it is too dangerous.
When INS arrests illegal aliens who have taken up residency and established themselves in American society, they have to have reasonable cause for arrest, and the most secure and reliable way of doing so is to catch them in the act of working illegally. This way they avoid all sorts of civil rights hurdles. In the case of expired VISAS, they initially avoid the expired VISA argument and go right after them on charges of working illegally using falsified identity. That is a federal crime and their case is rock solid. Raids have taken place at work places that have resulted in hundreds of arrests and deportations in swoops. It is much more efficient than sending out undercover officers to track down Juan and Pablo who for all they know, could be renting a room from craigslist on the other side of the country. Overstaying VISAS is the initial crime but people who overstay visas do so because they want to stay in the USA and make money. They make money by getting employed. And instead of the INS hunting down where they live - which is much more difficult and requires more resources - it is more efficient for them to simply find out where they work, and then show up at their job with an officer with handcuffs. The same is true for those who come illegally with no VISAS. The best way to identify illegals is to track them through employment records and look for mismatched SS numbers. Not only is this the most efficient way of finding an illegal alien, they can usually find multiple illegals working at the same place of employment.
How many illegal’s are deported a year? I don’t know do you?
Why do I have to clarify everything two and three times for you? AGAIN, when I say deported, I refer to the official process of deportation as it applies to those who established themselves in society illegally. I'm not referring to the hundreds and thousands of people who are being turned away at the border. That isn't really being deported so much as it is being turned away. [/quote}
HuH! Are you saying that the INS chase hundreds of thousand of people back over the border? Or are you saying that there is a line and we just say sorry, you can’t come in? That makes no sense at all and living near the border I think your full of crap. How far does a illegal have to be away from the border before he is considered a illegal? My friend got picked up at the Temecula check point and almost got deported and he lives an hour 1 ½ hours from the border. His Son is a Marine and we gave him letters saying he a great guy, and he is allowed to stay until a hearing. Once they cross the border and are arrested or detained they have to go through the deportation process, at least they are suppose to..Again, you don't understand the economic dynamics which determine the economic input of illegal aliens. The university economists and sociologists involved in these studies understand it well enough, but people like you don't like to consider the data that adds to their input. You only want to focus on the stuff they "drain" and then use federal tax alone to compare it with. Only in this way can you create a fantasy world where illegals don't contribute as much as they use. Again, the economic argument has been shot down. The crime argument has been shot down. Hell, even the murdererd rancher, as it turns out, wasn't killed by illegal residents, but rather the Mexican drug cartel (which operates independent of illegal residents and thrives because of the demand that wealthier white Americans provide).
Amazing, was the person who shot the rancher here illegally or not? You just don’t get it Kevin. I live in So Cal, grew up in So Cal and I can insure you that Black, brown, yellow, and White…all do drugs, and there are wealthy in all races here. Talks about bigots…it’s the white mans fault the rancher was murdered? Unbelievable.
Look Kevin you gave me statistics that are bogus, they are false and flat out lies, yet you stick by them as if the have substance. I want to test these stats Kevin, and we can see if they stand? If they stand up then it will show I’m wrong and I will admit that. All I’m trying to do is test your claims but you do not want to go there?
MG